Articulating the A Priori-A Posteriori Distinction

In Essays on A Priori Knowledge and Justification. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press. pp. 289-327 (2012)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The distinction between a priori knowledge and a posteriori knowledge has come under attack in the recent literature by Philip Kitcher, John Hawthorne, C. S. Jenkins, and Timothy Williamson. Evaluating the attacks requires answering two questions. First, have they hit their target? Second, are they compelling? My goal is to argue that the attacks fail because they miss their target. Since the attacks are directed at a particular concept or distinction, they must accurately locate the target concept or distinction. Accurately locating the target concept or distinction requires correctly articulating that concept or distinction. The attacks miss their target because they fail to correctly articulate the target concept or distinction. I go on to present a different challenge to the a priori-a posteriori distinction. This challenge is not directed at the coherence or significance of the distinction. Its target is the traditional view that all knowledge (or justified belief) is either a priori or a posteriori.
Categories
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Reprint years
2012
PhilPapers/Archive ID
CASPD-4
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-02-26
View other versions
Added to PP index
2011-06-21

Total views
247 ( #20,375 of 54,611 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
95 ( #5,845 of 54,611 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.